Imagine a world where children were first introduced to observations, critical thinking and scientific method, complete with explanations of the origins of the universe based on science, and only much, much later introduced to a thought experiment that it was all created by an invisible being which was in turn created by stone age humans.
Which would impress them more, the ambiguous (and clearly factually incorrect) writings of unqualified post-stone age authors who claimed their writings had been written by a "god", or the ideas and conclusions that have survived the rigors of examination which has become the very foundation of science.
Just because our forebears would have lynched anyone who explained the insignificance of their known "world", (or claimed that the sun and stars didn't revolve around the earth), doesn't mean they were right.
Edit: I accept that I can't prove that invisible gods don't exist, but based on how they are described, they would surely be able to prove that they DO exist. Yet they haven't. This is because "gods move in mysterious ways". Yeah, right, and about this bridge I have for sale...